MX Linux Forum

I'll tell you what I am thinking: mX-14 should be the go-to distro at installfests. It works fast on older hardware and I'm sure it screams on newer hardware. The majority of users apend their time on the internet online or in office applications. It just occurred to me.... how does this thing fare as a gamers system? Another thing..... is 64 bit that important for most users? You need... what is it... 8 gig of ram to make it of any use; don't you?

bmike1 wrote:I'll tell you what I am thinking: mX-14 should be the go-to distro at installfests. It works fast on older hardware and I'm sure it screams on newer hardware. The majority of users apend their time on the internet online or in office applications. It just occurred to me.... how does this thing fare as a gamers system? Another thing..... is 64 bit that important for most users? You need... what is it... 8 gig of ram to make it of any use; don't you?

Steam for Linux is 32-bit only, though you can run it on 64-bit. I'm sure many proprietary games are 32-bit builds only, too. Almost all open-source games do have 64-bit versions, though, and could run faster in 64-bit.

See benchmarks here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... 3264&num=3

The amount of RAM really doesn't make a lot of difference, though you can find benchmarks that suggest that PAE does slow a system down somewhat.

Where you do get a big speedup is in number-crunching, such as compression-decompression, encryption, video transcoding, 3D rendering, and so on.

I'm sure the spectators were marking the hienea from the bench..... oh wait.... I don't think that link is right.

Whoops, wrong link --this one is probably better: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a ... 3264&num=3

I'll fix the first link

As just a general idea what gets. Games don't seem to get a big speedup, but other CPU-intensive programs do.

So, for the original question, it should be a fine gamer's system.

A 32-bit non-pae kernel is limited to 4GB of RAM -- theoretically. In practice, it's less than that. A 32-bit pae kernel takes you to 64GB (again theoretically). A 64-bit kernel takes you to infinity -- almost -- 2^64 bytes to be exact, or about 18,000,000,000,000,000,000 bytes.

Where you do get a big speedup is in number-crunching, such as compression-decompression, encryption, video transcoding, 3D rendering, and so on.

That about says it all. If you encrypt a disk/partition you might want to do some testing at least. When I use K9Copy to backup a DVD it takes about 60% of the time to complete with a 64 bit OS as opposed to 32 bit. I don't do enough of that to make 64 bit a necessity.

lucky9 wrote:

When I use K9Copy to backup a DVD it takes about 60% of the time to complete with a 64 bit OS as opposed to 32 bit. I don't do enough of that to make 64 bit a necessity.

Where do you get k9copy? It seems to be gone from the repositories. I checked around the 'net and others are upset to see that it's gone as well.

My Daily Driver is Mepis 11-64. I still get security updates so see no real reason to change. It's solid as a rock and very usable. And K9Copy is still in the Squeeze repos.

joany wrote:Where do you get k9copy? It seems to be gone from the repositories. I checked around the 'net and others are upset to see that it's gone as well.

Development stopped in 2011:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo ... bug=686504

Chris

That doesn't mean that the software doesn't do what it's supposed to do. I really don't need any new features. There are some disks that it can't handle. That's not a problem for me. They are few and far between. I doubt that I'll ever (at my age) convert to BluRay or whatever is next in the format changes. Not unless they stop making DVD altogether.

Mepis has always been my go-to distribution.
For years the live CD was a miracle tool, and could fix almost any problem, in your linux box, or a friends Win machine.Good HW detection and very stable performance since 3.4 and 6.5.

Later I enjoyed antix 13, as it powers an ancient laptop that does ONLY my electronic banking, no other browsing no e-mails.
Antix 13 does well, I keep the security updates proper.

Now enjoying MX-14. Like Mepis 12, totally stable (well except flash and iceweasel crashes), the OS never goes down, sure an app can fail, but we can kill things, and reload.

My "go to distro" for linux newbies moving from XP is Linux Lite 1.0.8; using an XFCE desktop with an Ubuntu 12.04.3 base. It's really easy to use and install (thanks to the ubuntu based installer that handles all resizing of partitions for the end user without them needing to understand how to use Gparted or similar to resize partitions themselves); and also has the equivalent of "meta package installers" under it's system menu, with nice options like a software center for installing new software (since package managers like Synaptic can be very confusing to new linux users, as it can make it difficult to understand what package name they need to select for installing a given program).

It's also very lean (running in around 150MB of memory, and even when using Firefox (the default browser), it runs great in a 512MB. It even uses a non-PAE kernel by default (with the option of easily installing a PAE kernel via it's menus).

I really like MX-14. But, I view it as a distro that you'd want to recommend to more experienced linux users, versus a user that's trying to install linux for the first time themselves.

Or, if you're setting up a machine for someone else, it's a great option. I've got MX-14 installed in a partition on my desktop, as well as on my wife's laptop (although she still sticks with the Mepis 11 and I haven't convinced her to switch to MX-14 yet), and on an Inspiron 11Z netbook that my niece is using (and she loves it and uses MX-14 full time).

But, for recommending a distro to someone that is going to install Linux themselves in a dual boot config with Windows (versus relying on a more experienced linux user to do that kind of thing for them), I stick with Linux Lite as my recommended distro for right now, as it's super easy for a new linux user to install in a dual boot config with Windows, without them needing to understand anything about file systems, partitioning, etc. (as the installer handles that kind of thing for them when it detects Windows is already installed and handles all of the partition resizing, etc. using it's defaults, just as other Ubuntu based installers can do for you).

The installers used by Mepis (and other distros using it like MX-14) were great 10 years ago. But, times changes, and most modern distros are smart enough to handle setting up a dual boot config with Windows without the user needing to do any manual partition resizing, creation of new partitions, etc. themselves using tools like Gparted.

IOW, just using the defaults presented by the installer with a distro like Linux Lite will get a linux newbie up and running in a dual boot config, without them needing to known anything about partitioning, file system types, etc.

So, at some point, it may be a good idea to consider using the installer code from other distros instead (after all, it's open source), to make it easier for a linux newbie to install and setup linux in a dual boot config with Windows without any help from more experienced linux users. We all take that kind of thing for granted (shrinking partitions, setting up an extended partition structure, creating a swap partition, other partitions for the linux installs, etc.). But, for someone that just wants to use an Operating System, that kind of thing can be very scary and alien to them; and a more transparent way to get someone up and running would be a good idea.

JimC wrote:I really like MX-14. But, I view it as a distro that you'd want to recommend to more experienced linux users, versus a user that's trying to install linux for the first time themselves.

One must not forget that the vast, vast majority of Windows users couldn't install and properly configure Windows themselves either. So in that sense, Linux is not more difficult than Windows. In fact, I would posit it is *less* difficult, comparing apples to apples. A default Windows install from generic install media will in most cases not connect to the Internet, will usually only have basic graphics, and may not have sound support. It will also take ages to bring it up to date with security updates. Not to mention it will only have basic functionality until software is added. I'm in the middle of doing just this on a W7 HP laptop with a failed hard drive.

A default Linux install (MX-14, Ubuntu, Mint, etc.) will in most cases be fully usable out of the box, and can be updated and fleshed out in minutes, not hours.

I have to agree with uncle mark,
On fast hardware, a Mepis 12 or MX-14 install can be 10 to 20 minutes, and when done you usually have all drivers and video. (in an ideal world anyway).
And you always have MANY applications, like firefox (iceweasel), office suite.... and the synaptic posibilities are awesome !

Windows is a long process...
-Jay

uncle mark wrote:

JimC wrote:I really like MX-14. But, I view it as a distro that you'd want to recommend to more experienced linux users, versus a user that's trying to install linux for the first time themselves.

One must not forget that the vast, vast majority of Windows users couldn't install and properly configure Windows themselves either. So in that sense, Linux is not more difficult than Windows. In fact, I would posit it is *less* difficult, comparing apples to apples. A default Windows install from generic install media will in most cases not connect to the Internet, will usually only have basic graphics, and may not have sound support. It will also take ages to bring it up to date with security updates. Not to mention it will only have basic functionality until software is added. I'm in the middle of doing just this on a W7 HP laptop with a failed hard drive.

A default Linux install (MX-14, Ubuntu, Mint, etc.) will in most cases be fully usable out of the box, and can be updated and fleshed out in minutes, not hours.

True and we all know how quick an install can be, complete with all useful programs and applications already included (which isn't the case with Windows), but the reality is that most people will not need to install Windows anyway, and most people will need to install Linux onto their existing Windows machine in order to HAVE a Linux installation.

So if they don't have anyone else installing a Linux system for them, they are going to have to do it themselves.

I agree the Ubuntu installer is straightforward. That said, I don't see what's so outdated or difficult about Mepis/MX's installer. Mepis was the first distro I installed as a newbie (at that time, it was the only distro where the graphics worked OOTB on my PC) and I found the installer incredibly clear and easy to use. Maybe you could spruce up its looks - make it prettier, less serious looking? - and maybe tweak the interface of one or two of its "pages", but I think it's fine.

I don't really go around demo-ing or installing distros for other people (except for my father), but until it died, I would have shown off Fuduntu (I installed it on my father's netbook) if I was going to be the one doing the installing.

The other choice, esp if the other person was going to do the installation themselves, would have been WattOS r6 (Ubuntu 12.04 LTS) - still supported until 2017, and it's pretty lightweight (LXDE) yet aesthetically pleasant and easy to use. For myself, I'm actually sad the latest version is now Debian; since I have more than enough Debian-based distros, but if it still works and installs well, it'll still be a distro I consider for other people.

MX is certainly a contender now, in the light of Fuduntu's demise and Watt's changes.

just tonight I asked my supervisor if he had a computer. "Yeah," he said, "but it has a virus." I talked to him a little and he said he'd like to give linux a try. SO I'm going to install mx-14.... the go-to distro.

[quote="JimC"] Or, if you're setting up a machine for someone else, it's a great option. I've got MX-14 installed in a partition on my desktop, as well as on my wife's laptop (although she still sticks with the Mepis 11 and I haven't convinced her to switch to MX-14 yet),
/quote]

My wife did not get the option. XP was banished, MX-14 installed, and she is very happy.

entropyfoe wrote:Mepis has always been my go-to distribution.

Mepis used to be mine, too -- for several years, really. I can see how MX-14 would be a great go-to distro for people now, depending on the user's needs. Can't say that I really have a single go-to distro anymore. There are lots of good distros out there to choose from for any given situation or purpose. For example, even though I don't run Linux Mint here these days, if I often did installations for other people, that might be the one I'd choose.

I have MX-14 on all of my computers but I'm yet searching for a Buntu based system that meets my needs. I like being able to use PPAs and there are other advantages. I was also sad to see that Watt went to Debian as it was the system I ran for nearly a year. Very light and efficient and it worked very well. I've played a bit with the new Watt and it needs work before it can be considered a goto system. I suspect I'll go back to Zorin Lite when the 14.04 based system is done sometime this summer.

I tried the Linux Lite 2.0 beta and it has promise but based on a few responses I got on the forum it won't be a system for me. Relinux is partially installed (it is a fork of remastersys) but it doesn't work and no answers were provided. I also loaded LXDE and was surprised when the login screen didn't offer a way to change the startup DE. I asked about this and was told since this system is strictly for Windows converts, they won't ever want to try another DE - I said thanks and goodbye...

I have MX-14 on all of my computers but I'm yet searching for a Buntu based system that meets my needs. I like being able to use PPAs and there are other advantages.

That was quick...

My go-to distro has to be efficient, simple, stable,
fast, based on Debian stable, with backports, Xfce4.1x,
and have a supportive community. Sounds like MX-14.

I've rolled and it's mostly stable, educational and fun.

Since 1998, it's been muLinux, Redhat, SuSE,
Mandrake, Mepis, Kanotix, sidux, Debian testing,
Ubuntu, Linuxmint, Arch, openSuse, Peppermint,
SalineOS, Manjaro, and now MX-14.

I try to 'look at' several distros. I'm unabashably KDE-centric. But I have current ISO's for KNOPPIX, Sabayon, PC-BSD/FreeBSD, netrunner, LinuxMint, FreeSBIE, KWheezy, SolydK-BE. Probably one or two that I'm forgetting. But I use SimplyMEPIS 11.0.xx for serious work in my Desktop PC. MX14 with additions has earned a spot on my Netbook as it's main distro. I like not having to do anything (mostly) to keep a system running.

Just last night I was talking to my supervisor at work (non-techy industry) about computers. He said that he has one but gloomily he said that it has a virus. I told him that I could give him an operating system that is impervious to viruses.. He said he is interested. Now I am debating between Mint and mX-14. I think I'll go with mX but think he'll like the pretty screen of Mint more. The computer is a couple of years old.

bmike1 wrote:Just last night I was talking to my supervisor at work (non-techy industry) about computers. He said that he has one but gloomily he said that it has a virus. I told him that I could give him an operating system that is impervious to viruses.. He said he is interested. Now I am debating between Mint and mX-14. I think I'll go with mX but think he'll like the pretty screen of Mint more. I need to ask him how old his computer is!

Not trying to talk you out of loading him up with Linux, but doesn't he know it can be fixed?

I'm continually amazed by the conditions of the infected machines brought to me. The few smart ones bring it to me immediately, as soon as it starts acting hinky. Those are nearly always quick and easy and cheap to fix, sometimes literally while they wait. But most of them just put up with it, knowing full well they're infected, until the machine finally grinds to a halt. Then they bring it to me.

Impervious may be a bit of overkill, resistant is probably more accurate.

uncle mark wrote: Not trying to talk you out of loading him up with Linux, but doesn't he know it can be fixed?

Can you teach me how to fix it for him? Is there like an open source fix-it program?

My go to is still M11, but am trying to learn MX for a couple of reasons. First I am helping those who are worried about XP and don't want to buy a new computer and usually need a midweight OS. Second I am thinking about the next few years and if Warren does nothing more with Mepis, then what do I want to do. I could go with a lot distributions, but I like this forum and the help and people in it so I think I'll stay right here until ya'll kick me out.

bmike1 wrote:

uncle mark wrote: Not trying to talk you out of loading him up with Linux, but doesn't he know it can be fixed?

Can you teach me how to fix it for him? Is there like an open source fix-it program?

No. Repairing infected Windows systems is an involved process. No quick fixes (unless you're lucky and nail your diag).

I must admit I am still drawn to KDE4 and Kubuntu 14.04 because of something most people here do not give a tinkers dam for, desktop effects. You know, the glitz, the wow factor, and buried within it all, some useful features.

I managed to install Compiz in MX-14 and the glitz is back, (and those buried useful features). It is surprising to me that Compz which has not been supported for some time works so well with MX-14.

As delivered MX-14 is very, very good. And what is even better, since it is Debian based, can be "tricked out" with screenlets, Gkrellm, Compiz and who knows what else.

richb wrote: I managed to install Compiz in MX-14 and the glitz is back, (and those buried useful features). It is surprising to me that Compz which has not been supported for some time works so well with MX-14.

As delivered MX-14 is very, very good. And what is even better, since it is Debian based, can be "tricked out" with screenlets, Gkrellm, Compiz and who knows what else.

Xwm has it's own built-in compositor I think. On my old box I only use it to make my panel background transparent though, no bling and glitz for me, thank you. I did play with screenlets in my old Xubuntu system, but I found myself minimizing applications just to check the weather or see what time it was. Now on the panel I can see both at a glance and save a little precious RAM.

I can't express how grateful I am to have found a simple, well-supported Xfce OS built on Debian Stable! Until now Xubuntu LTS has always been my "fallback" distro, but now that MX is around, I have a new "home" in "a better neighborhood."

MX-14 has a built in compositor as well for minimal functions.

richb wrote:I must admit I am still drawn to KDE4 and Kubuntu 14.04 .

Rich, I looked at Kubuntu 14.04 and trialled one of the Beta versions, but am still running
12.04 alongside MX-14 - which does most of the day to day tasks. Does 14.04 show any
great advances over 12.04?

Gordon.

Gordon Cooper wrote:

richb wrote:I must admit I am still drawn to KDE4 and Kubuntu 14.04 .

Rich, I looked at Kubuntu 14.04 and trialled one of the Beta versions, but am still running
12.04 alongside MX-14 - which does most of the day to day tasks. Does 14.04 show any
great advances over 12.04?

Gordon.

I never used 12.04 so cannot say. I did use 13.04. then 13.10. I would characterize the changes from them as subtle, and as they say "under the hood", as well as bug fixes.

richb wrote:

Gordon Cooper wrote:

richb wrote:I must admit I am still drawn to KDE4 and Kubuntu 14.04 .

Rich, I looked at Kubuntu 14.04 and trialled one of the Beta versions, but am still running
12.04 alongside MX-14 - which does most of the day to day tasks. Does 14.04 show any
great advances over 12.04?

Gordon.

I never used 12.04 so cannot say. I did use 13.04. then 13.10. I would characterize the changes from them as subtle, and as they say "under the hood", as well as bug fixes.

I've kinda been wondering about the same thing; I've got Kubuntu 12.04 here.

A few things to look at:

http://www.kubuntu.org/news/kubuntu-14.04
http://www.tuxarena.com/2014/04/taking- ... -kde-4-13/
http://www.webupd8.org/2014/04/see-what ... se-of.html

I'm sticking with Kubuntu 12.04 for now, although I've already replaced Ubuntu 12.04 with Ubuntu 14.04. I think I might want to install Kubuntu 14.04 after the first point release, but I'm quite happy with 12.04, so maybe I'll just keep it.

I have Kubuntu 12.04 on my laptop and it's fine. Was installed as 11.04 and I followed the system's notifications and instructions to upgrade to 12.04 without problems.

Reliable Buntu+KDE LTS system without the Ubuntu hype and commercialism. I didn't like the Muon package manager but it's no trouble to install Synaptic.

It is the one distro I have that I don't customise, save for turning the wallpaper switcher on and very minimal desktop effects (very slightly wobbly windows and Expose). It seems to be a very pure expression of KDE.

Not intending to upgrade to 14.04 at the moment.

richb wrote: I never used 12.04 so cannot say. I did use 13.04. then 13.10. I would characterize the changes from them as subtle, and as they say "under the hood", as well as bug fixes.

Thank you and others for the comments. On a Ubuntu group that I read, several have had problems with
parts of their 14.04 installations, I'll stay wth 12.04 for now.

My 12.04.x wasn't installed until the 12.04.1 version. But I upgraded the kernel and version of KDE so it's no longer based on 12.04 LTS. But I'll wait for the point release to even download it.

I spent a few hours last night tweaking the Linux Lite 2.0 Beta and got it working as I want it. Got a remastersys clone installed so I can make a snapshot (that works) and got rid of some stuff and added other stuff. Now I have a 14.04 based system that does what I need it to do. I have it and MX-14 on my work laptop in a dual-boot config so I can work with either system and do some comparisons. The LL I installed is 64 bit and of course MX-14 is 32 bit so I'm doing some real life benchmarking of how the systems work for me. One nice thing about LL is they have alacarte (menu editor) working 100% reliably. I need to change the login manager so I can select the DE I want to use but getting remastersys working reliably was enough for one evening. I tested the snapshot I made last night by writing it to USB and installing the system on my HP Netbook this morning - it worked perfectly...

I see there are other KDE aficionados hiding in the shadows.

joany wrote:I see there are other KDE aficionados hiding in the shadows.

I am.

joany wrote:I see there are other KDE aficionados hiding in the shadows.

Another one here. I'm going to have a decision to make some time in the not-too-distant future. My ol' reliable M11 is just great, thankyouverymuch, but I won't be able to use it forever. Probably have to see what shakes out after Jessie goes stable. Hopefully SolydK BE will still be under active development.

uncle mark wrote:

joany wrote:I see there are other KDE aficionados hiding in the shadows.

Another one here. I'm going to have a decision to make some time in the not-too-distant future. My ol' reliable M11 is just great, thankyouverymuch, but I won't be able to use it forever. Probably have to see what shakes out after Jessie goes stable. Hopefully SolydK BE will still be under active development.

My long-range plans hinge on whether there will be a future MX-XX. If not, I'll probably use AntiX core with KDE_stable meta-installer if that's still available, hoping that a future AntiX would incorporate the nice MX-14 tools.

It seems that Debian's rarely mentioned as a long-term option here, but it's always there. For long-time Mepis users especially, once you get Debian installed and set up, the rest is mostly what you're already used to.

MX looks great, but who knows about its future? SalineOS was great, too, and it's gone. There might never be another Mepis release. SolydXK looks like a nice one, but again, you never know. Looking 5+ years down the road, Debian Stable's the best bet out there. in my book -- whether you like Xfce or KDE or something else.

uncle mark wrote:

joany wrote:I see there are other KDE aficionados hiding in the shadows.

Another one here. I'm going to have a decision to make some time in the not-too-distant future. My ol' reliable M11 is just great, thankyouverymuch, but I won't be able to use it forever. Probably have to see what shakes out after Jessie goes stable. Hopefully SolydK BE will still be under active development.

I have high hopes for Jessie—I've been using it for quite a while now and like it a lot despite the constant avalanche of updates that accompany the testing phase. I've never looked at SolydK BE but I do have SolydXK here. I used it briefly but have since abandoned it for pure Jessie due to breakage, and to my own philosophical choices.

An LTS Buntu base is pretty attractive as it gives you long term support as well as great software selection. You don't have to ask packagers to help you out if you need something newer than is in the stable repository or something unique. Having said this I will also tip my hat to the folks here as they are very responsive to "customer" requests and generally have a solution quickly. With the huge user base that Buntu has, problems tend to get ID'd and fixed quickly and answers to questions are easy to find. I like relative stability but I also like current software and Debian stable is not the answer for that. It may be just a perception but if needed changes aren't being made I doubt developers would go through the effort to release new versions of stuff.

I'll be keeping MX-14 installed and operational as it's a great system but my daily driver will likely be 64 bit Buntu 14.04 based. While there may be no real reason to run a 64 bit system, all of my hardware is 64 bit and it just seems wrong in some way to run a 32 bit system...

DBeckett wrote:I have high hopes for Jessie—I've been using it for quite a while now and like it a lot despite the constant avalanche of updates that accompany the testing phase.

I'm looking forward to it. I like to wait until some weeks after "the freeze" before I start in with Testing.

NGIB wrote:An LTS Buntu base is pretty attractive as it gives you long term support as well as great software selection. You don't have to ask packagers to help you out if you need something newer than is in the stable repository or something unique.

Really? They do it without asking?

NGIB wrote: While there may be no real reason to run a 64 bit system, all of my hardware is 64 bit and it just seems wrong in some way to run a 32 bit system...

If there's no reason to run 64-bit, then it can't be wrong not to run it.

joany wrote:

NGIB wrote:An LTS Buntu base is pretty attractive as it gives you long term support as well as great software selection. You don't have to ask packagers to help you out if you need something newer than is in the stable repository or something unique.

Really? They do it without asking?

NGIB wrote: While there may be no real reason to run a 64 bit system, all of my hardware is 64 bit and it just seems wrong in some way to run a 32 bit system...

If there's no reason to run 64-bit, then it can't be wrong not to run it.

On number 1, the software in the Buntu repos is updated quickly every time a developer releases a new version. Also, you can use PPAs that point directly at the developer's site to keep your system updated automatically.

On number 2, why do developers go though the time and effort to create 64 bit distros if they aren't ever necessary? Again it may just be perception but perception is reality to each of us.

I also wonder whether MX-14 will be around for the long term. MEPIS has been dormant a long time and antiX is a distro in it's own right. If anticapitalista decides to focus only on his efforts - will MX-14 become like MEPIS? Makes one wonder. And no I'm not being negative at all but just being realistic. I had multiple computers happily running Solus and the plug was pulled on that one rather quickly. Since MX-14 is just a collaboration, and not a distro in it's own right, will all parties remain interested in it for the long haul...

Understand the legitimate concern about future development.

That is one of the reasons I choose MX-14.
So long as it is active it just gets better.
If, for some reason, it is no longer active,
I modify my *.list's as follows by commenting items direct from Mepis-antiX:and now I'm running Debian Stable. I would continue to use all the neat MX apps until they might break with a new release --so be it.

MX-14 is Debian. The differences between distros is mainly the stuff that is loaded at boot, the eye-candy, the added utilities and technical brilliance. It will still be Debian.

Richard wrote:MX-14 is Debian. The differences between distros is mainly the stuff that is loaded at boot, the eye-candy, the added utilities and technical brilliance. It will still be Debian.

The same can be (could have been?) said for MEPIS. It's that technical brilliance that's so valuable. That's one reason I asked about an MX-KDE release early on. No disrespect to MX intended, but for my workaday environment I don't want to switch from KDE if I can help it. MX with KDE added has been a viable option for Joany, so it may be one for me as well. Will just have to see when the time comes.

In the meantime, I'm really enjoying MX on the little netbook I was gifted. That was the target, and MX hit the bull's eye.

Hey Uncle,
Here's something to consider if you have a spare partition
on your desktop harddisk or in a VBox.
http://tutorialforlinux.com/2013/11/13/ ... fce-linux/
I think I'll give it a try also. I still have an empty partition.

I used KDE3 for many years but didn't adapt well to KDE4.
I still use Krusader on Xfce4 with all the stuff it needs.
In my mind, there just isn't anything else as complete.
Krusader was the app that made switching to Linux
much easier. And I've tried. I like & use Thunar also.

KDE was really a complete package then and I imagine
it still is. I met and translated for Aaron Seigo a few
years back at a FLOSS event in Venezuela.
The KDE team do admirable work.

At this point in time it makes no difference to me what I install as my Daily Driver. It will be 64 bit. It will be based on debian Stable. I'll take a look at Testing releases like kubuntu 14.04.x. But their upgrade schedule is way too frantic for me. SolydK BE, KWheezy, even antiX 64 bit built to my spec.... or any similar OS is fine. For me the OS is a tool so I want it to work, first time and every time. There are plenty of people who like testing software, or don't mind things not working quite right all the time. Not me.

With the tools available nowadays 64 bit will run whatever comes along. And I like the additional speed when transcoding, etc. There's still a place for 32 bit for sure. Many Personal Computers require 32 bit. I have one.

Kubuntu 14.04 is an LTS release, meaning Long Term Support. It is not a test release as far as I know.

Thought it was based on Jessie. My mistake.

richb wrote:Kubuntu 14.04 is an LTS release, meaning Long Term Support. It is not a test release as far as I know.

The test release is Kubuntu 14.10 (Utopic Unicorn)
http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/kubuntu/daily-live/current/

For me the OS is a tool so I want it to work, first time and every time. There are plenty of people who like testing software, or don't mind things not working quite right all the time. Not me.

Call for help from Debian KDE Team :lipsrsealed:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2 ... 00008.html

In particular, there are bugs affecting the version in wheezy,

For quite a while now the KDE team has been severely understaffed. We maintain
a lot of packages, with many different kinds of bugs, but we don't have enough
people to do all the work that needs to be done ... In particular, there are bugs affecting the version in wheezy ...

Oh, dear! Not good.

That's a reason I've never been a fan of KDE, to big, to complicated and to many moving parts. I read the threads about how pieces break and I'm glad I never got involved with it...

NGIB wrote:That's a reason I've never been a fan of KDE, to big, to complicated and to many moving parts. I read the threads about how pieces break and I'm glad I never got involved with it...

Not that complicated and rarely if ever breaks. Too big? I really do not care with 500 Gig hard drive and 12 Gig of ram, size is immaterial.

Features comes (usually) with size. The size of an OS is just barely material. For the complexity that KDE has it comes out pretty good with stability. I rarely have anything happen that requires a restart. Every once in a while I'll have to restart the xserver. (I've had more trouble trying to post on our forum, because I forget to hit Submit before closing a Tab.) PEBKAC

richb wrote:

NGIB wrote:That's a reason I've never been a fan of KDE, to big, to complicated and to many moving parts. I read the threads about how pieces break and I'm glad I never got involved with it...

Not that complicated and rarely if ever breaks. Too big? I really do not care with 500 Gig hard drive and 12 Gig of ram, size is immaterial.

Agreed.

KDE can become ponderous and quirky on old and seriously underpowered equipment, but blaming the software is a bit shortsighted.